The GW College Libertarians and GW College Democrats faced off on Wednesday evening in a debate about the role of the NSA. The conversation focused on Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing and what changes need to be implemented concerning the NSA’s intrusive behavior. Each team had two debaters and a GW professor moderated the event.
The debate began with an opening statement by both sides. The Libertarians argued that although security and safety are of the utmost importance, “We must be vigilant over how we have oversight over these instruments to protect us from potential dangers and make sure we don’t go beyond the threshold of what is acceptable under the law,” said one debater on the Libertarians side. “If laws need to be changed, then change them, but laws should never be broken.” They also called for increased transparency and a stricter process to obtain warrants to access personal information.
The Democrats stated that President Obama has strongly supported a reform to protect civil liberties and personal privacy, while ensuring that national security remains a top priority. “We believe that the proposal set forth by the President addressed the concerns that arose since the documents were leaked last May,” said the debater from the College Democrats. The President’s proposal includes transitioning from bulk data collection and giving greater data transparency to information held by the government.
The Libertarians focused on the idea that the NSA is overstepping the fourth amendment by screening phone calls, and bullying phone companies into handing over information and records. They also stressed that Edward Snowden should not be punished for his behavior because he helped spark a much needed conversation.
In response, the Democrats argued that the powers of the NSA have been an ongoing conversation and that Edward Snowden’s behavior only dramatized the issue and created unwanted and inaccurate depictions of the NSA’s behavior. The Democrats denied the Libertarian’s accusation that the NSA is overstepping the Fourth Amendment, arguing the NSA is only able to view the interaction of phone numbers and the duration of phone calls. They cannot view any actual content of these calls, emails, or text messages.
Both sides discussed the “two and three hop rule” that enables the NSA to screen information from non US citizens who they believe to be a potential threat. Under this rule, if a person is two or three steps away from this contact, they are liable for information screening as well. In 2011, researchers at the University of Milan found that everyone on the Internet was, on average, 4.74 steps away from everyone else. In other words, the NSA has access to a very large amount of information based on this rule.
The debate was well attended by members of both groups.